El consumo de drogas y su tratamiento desde la perspectiva de familiares y amigos de consumidores en Bogotá, Colombia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
En este estudio, se presenta el análisis parcial de los resultados de un trabajo cuantitativo, relacionado con la perspectiva que tienen los familiares y amigos de consumidores frente al tratamiento para los problemas derivados del consumo de drogas ilícitas. Participaron 104 usuarios de los servicios de salud de Bogotá, El 58% considera el consumo como una enfermedad que necesita tratamiento. El 56% identifica el hospital general como la principal alternativa para el mismo y, 95% al Estado como el principal responsable de este. Las instituciones privadas son las más conocidas y dentro de estas, las comunidades terapéuticas y los grupos religiosos aparecen como los que más se comprometen con la problemática. Para el 73% los servicios existentes no son suficientes y el acceso a la utilización de los mismos es difícil. El estigma es la principal barrera para solicitar la atención, solo el 50% considera que los tratamientos son útiles. Es necesaria una mayor difusión de los recursos existentes, para aumentar su demanda y utilización.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".